Oracle WebLogic Server Reviews

I worked for a product-based company that supports different application deployment platforms like WildFly, WebSphere, and WebLogic, along with different databases. We had to set up our own environment. Sometimes, when we faced production issues, we used Oracle WebLogic Server to set up our environment according to the client setup.

One of the good features of Oracle WebLogic Server was the ability to add some custom parameters to its deployment and performance.

Oracle WebLogic Server's configuration could be improved because we need to do multiple configurations when setting up anything. A UI-based wizard may help in the product's configuration. We used to go into the direct folder structure and look for specific config files to make changes.

Performance tuning-related parameters should be added in the next release of Oracle WebLogic Server. Backend server additions and load-balancing features should also be included in the next release.

I have been using Oracle WebLogic Server for three to four years.

Oracle WebLogic Server is a stable solution.

In my team, there were almost 10 to 12 people using Oracle WebLogic Server, but other team members also used it. So, around a hundred-plus people were using the solution in my organization.

When we were new to Oracle WebLogic Server, its initial setup was quite difficult. Later, when we got used to it, we learned which customization we could do.

I would recommend people to use Oracle WebLogic Server. Although some configurations are difficult, the solution is easy to use.

Overall, I rate Oracle WebLogic Server an eight out of ten.

It's used to deploy applications. There are applications we are deploying on the project server.

It's similar to other application servers and it's providing all the features for deployment and entering data sources. It has all the enterprise features we need.

The initial setup is straightforward.

Technical support is helpful.

It's a scalable product.

The solution is stable. 

I can't point to anything missing. 

I've used the solution for around ten years. I've used it for a very long time. 

The stability is great. There are no bugs or glitches. it doesn't crash or freeze. Its performance is reliable. 

You can scale the solution if you need to. It's scalable. 

It's used by all the developers for deploying the applications, therefore, likely a few thousand users are on the product.

Technical support is very helpful. We are satisfied with their level of service.

Positive

The initial setup is simple and straightforward. it's not difficult or complex. A company should have problems implementing it. I'd rate it a five out of five. 

We handled the implementation ourselves. We did the setup in-house with our own team.

I don't have any information about the licensing aspects of the product.

I'd rate the solution an eight out of ten. We have been happy with it.

We use the solution to avail applications to end users on their internet browsers. Thus, users can use applications on web browsers without installing anything else on their laptops. The solution works as an application server where you can publish applications using internet technology.

The solution's most valuable feature is the ease of use. Its JDeveloper feature develops an environment and helps publish the applications easily. The solution is very comprehensive in maintenance and administration as well.

They should improve the solution's garbage collection feature. Most frequently, it runs out of memory processes. Also, sometimes the solution gets slow due to the same. It needs to release the memory more effectively. At the moment, we have to restart the solution to release the memory. Also, the performance could be quicker to avoid getting stuck.

We have been using the solution for 15 years.

It is a stable solution. They need to work on the garbage collection feature. They might have addressed it in newer versions.

The solution works well in load balancing. I have tried it on multiple servers; it has good features. While the solution was at its peak in our organization, there were 120 users.

The solution's initial setup is simple if you have tried it several times. It requires knowledge to set up and deploy the solution. Initially, it would be like a trial and error phase. Later on, it just takes three to four hours to complete the process.

We implemented the setup with the help of our in-house team.

The solution's ROI is good because it is a database technology we require for our business case. It makes the process of putting the application online, centralized, controlled, and implementation easier. We don't need anything from the client's side.

The solution's licensing is high-priced. But they offer different pricing packages based on the database. The users can consult the team and get recommendations on the best pricing model for them.

You need to have planning if you decide to buy the solution. After learning it, you should go through the concept again because, initially, the theory part may not make sense. Next, you should start with the procedure to verify your learning. Then, with some experience, go back to the theory part to grasp and understand the concept.

I recommend the solution to others and rate it as an eight.

I do have specific requirements for the solution from one of my clients. They need to deploy job applications and serve local customers who fill out forms and generate reports. The client asked me to set up a server to manage and monitor these processes. That's why I established the environment for them, with two robotic servers running on different nodes and handling forms on separate nodes. They are interconnected, so if one goes down, it's routed to the other server.

The solution provides easy monitoring. Accessing all the logs is easy, and deploying application versions is smooth.

There's a bug related to the managed services, particularly when dealing with a substantial database load applied to the managed servers. They tend to crash under such circumstances. To address this, there needs to be a focus on configuring the managed servers to handle new configurations or accept a higher load. These are some aspects that need to change. Otherwise, it's a good product.

Some people have had both good and bad experiences with customer service and support in our organization. It varies among individuals.

The setup is straightforward. You only need to do it once, and after a few steps, you can close your eyes and do it. It's like recalling a process from high school; you guide someone through it once, and then they can easily replicate it across multiple servers. With Oracle WebLogic Server, there's no dealing with devices; you set up the directory and move.

The solution’s pricing is affordable.

I recommend the product because the installation is easy, it provides a secure environment, and it's easy to manage. What matters is if the tool meets your specific requirements. It makes sense for you if it aligns with your needs and no other solution fulfills those requirements. If your specific need revolves around security and you prioritize that, then a free product might not provide the level of security you're looking for. Overall, I rate the product a perfect ten.

I use Oracle WebLogic Server in my company as a front-end server to host our applications.

Oracle WebLogic Server has a bunch of ready features that are easy to use and understand. Less coding is required when it comes to Oracle WebLogic Server. A user can function as an administrator of the solution without much coding knowledge. Mostly, all the latest features, like multithreading and multiple consoles to handle multiple servers, along with other features like queues and topics, are made available in Oracle WebLogic Server.

The error handling area in Oracle WebLogic Server is an area of concern where improvements are required. The ability of the product to show the appropriate or correct error in the front-end application is an area where improvements are required. In Oracle WebLogic Server, whenever there is an error, my company has to check for the logs at the back-end, so it would be better if the errors were displayed in the front-end application.

I have been using Oracle WebLogic Server for six to seven years. My company operates an integrator for Oracle.

It is a very stable solution.

It is a scalable solution.

Mostly, my company deals with enterprise-sized businesses.

I rate the technical support a six out of ten.

Neutral

Oracle WebLogic Server is easy to install.

The time required for Oracle WebLogic's installation phase depends on the type of configurations to be done in an IT environment. For a big enterprise environment, the installation phase may take around a week to be completed, while for a small enterprise, it can be done in a day.

Only two or three people were required to take care of the product's deployment process.

As Oracle WebLogic Server is a product from Oracle, it is bound to be an expensive solution. My company needs to make annual payments towards the licensing costs attached to the product. AMC is a part, the cost of which is not covered under the licenses for Oracle WebLogic Server.

Oracle WebLogic Server is not difficult to maintain. It is easy to maintain.

A developer or consultant should have a basic knowledge of servers and or Windows Server, wherever it is installed in their company. A company's developer or consultant should do regular maintenance activities like checking if logs are getting written properly while also ensuring that configurations are taken care of on a regular basis. The maintenance part may not seem easy, aforementioned aspects have to be taken care of to maintain the product.

Oracle WebLogic Server is a product meant for those who want a stable and scalable tool in their environment.

I rate the overall tool a nine out of ten.

Primarily we deploy WebLogic both as an in-house and a private cloud-hosted server solution for our customers. We have got a couple of different use cases as per specific clients. Our personal use case is just to understand its functionality deploy it to adapt to client needs.  

The most valued feature is probably simply just the overall functionality. The product has a lot of versatility as far as what we can do with it and that flexibility is valuable in our ability to leverage deployments.  

We have some pain points with the product. First of all, we know that the Oracle-related WebLogic updates tend to be a little volatile. That is in regards to their regular updates. They do quarterly security patch updates.  

People do the updates and over a period and for some of them the updates lead to the product becoming unstable. The updates do not always apply correctly. If there is something that is a little bit off — say, if a customer has installed an extra piece of software or something to modify the system — this can create issues. There are a lot of reasons that can cause WebLogic updates to end up making the whole system unstable.  

Having to do with that update issue, we would like to see Oracle add the Diagnostic Pack back in. They used to have it included with the product and it was removed. There is another piece that was also useful in helping with product analysis and stability that they took out after 10g. Right now these helpful modules are just add-ons. Really they should be part of the standard package.  

We have got a couple of other smaller problems, but right now our main problem is the Oracle CPU updates. They are timely, but primal as far as installations.  

We have been working with Oracle WebLogic Server for a little over five years.  

Besides some issues with updates, the product has been pretty stable for us. The instability that we sometimes experience is not necessarily the fault of the product itself and likely is linked to modifications. I can not downgrade the stability of WebLogic based on trying to make the product do something that it was not exactly designed for.  

The scalability of the solution seems to be fine. We use the standard edition; we do not use the enterprise level, so I do not have direct experience with the enterprise version. We have been talking to Oracle about changing that and possibly upgrading. They are currently setting up a proof of concept for us, but we have not completed that evaluation yet. The enterprise package would hopefully provide even better opportunities to scale.  

We are pretty good at doing our own technical support and supplying it for our clients. The biggest problem right now is versioning. As they update versions we have had to buy extended support to cover potential issues with older versions.  

Oracle has quarterly updates, but the licensing fees are annual. In our case, the licensing runs into the thousands as an annual cost. But the pricing depends on the model that you have adopted.  

As we go through our contracts and bring on new clients, it is just a part of our normal due diligence to review new products and compare what is available on the market to make sure that we are using the best technology. "The best" is not necessarily the most current, and it is better to describe it as "the best" because newer is not always better. Mature options can evolve and sometimes that result is better than using an otherwise immature solution just because it is new. We just look at options and fit them to use cases.  

My advice to people considering WebLogic as a solution is to do the same thing that we do right now and what we make sure our clients do. Doing due diligence is not really an option. You have to make sure that a solution — any solution you are considering — matches up with the use cases you are planning to deploy it for. There is no point in investing in the wrong solution.  

On a scale from one to ten where one is the worst and ten is the best, I would rate Oracle WebLogic Server as a seven or eight. If I had to choose between those, I would say seven. It could easily be better and that really detracts from the user and administrative experience.  

We primarily use it for ADA applications. We develop on the ADS platform and use forms and records.

It is good because it's easy to use. I mean, it's not just a matter of being easy. It's actually a very stable tool and service, based on my experience. It doesn't crash frequently like other servers. We don't have to restart it every week or so. It's reliable. However, when it does encounter issues, it's not always easy to identify the problem.

It is not easy maintenance and has some performance issues. Let's say you have a log file filled with information, and you put your tool in trace mode. It's not easy to diagnose or identify the root cause of the problem. It requires lots of experience and a lot of patience and time to delve into such deep-seated issues. You need a lot of time and a precise location to address the problem effectively because you have to read a lot and a lot of log files because there is no diagnostic tool available that is good enough to take you in the right direction.

In additional features, I would like to see diagnostic tools. 

I have been working with Oracle WebLogic Server for the last ten years. It has been the basis for several HPE CTP ADA applications. We are currently using version 12.

In my experience, it is a stable solution. I would rate the stability a ten out of ten. 

I have little experience with creating clusters, but overall, it seems to be scalable. There are more than a hundred end users using this solution. 

The customer service and support team is not very good in general. It could be more knowledgeable. Oracle needs to have more knowledge at the first level of support. It's essential to provide excellent support at that level.

Neutral

The initial setup is easy. It is generally easy. However, if you're talking to someone who is new to this kind of work, they may find it challenging without proper guidance and an installation guide.

A basic understanding of the operating system and networking is necessary to communicate effectively with the tool. It's a fundamental requirement for anyone working with such a tool.

In my company, we have around five or six WebLogic servers. We use Oracle Enterprise Manager (OEM) for monitoring and diagnostics. So, I can delve deeper and perform diagnostics. There are two of us managing the maintenance. We have a maintenance agreement with Oracle. It's an on-call support model.

The first time installation may take some time. However, subsequent installations are quicker. Let's say it takes a few hours initially, but subsequent installations can be done in much less time. It's not a lengthy process overall. Just a few hours for installation and then additional time for deployment, adaptation, and configuration. So, it's not a significant time commitment.

Configuration is a big problem. It requires a deeper understanding and expertise. It comes with basic installation and preconfigured parameters, which are usually good enough for the first time. 

However, when it comes to performance, there are numerous parameters to consider. If you don't fully understand the relationship between these parameters, it becomes challenging. It's crucial to either have a self-tuning diagnostic tool or to perform performance tuning with a good understanding of the parameters because there are quite a lot of them.

The number of people required for the deployment depends. In a small company, one person may handle the entire process. They install the server, set up the services, and perform all the necessary tasks. However, in big companies, there might be different individuals assigned to each stage of the installation. For me, I handled the installation process in my company. I work as a system administrator and a DBA, so I have the necessary expertise. Perhaps in different organizations, it may be distributed across different technical roles and teams.

Oracle is not cheap. We use a yearly-basis subscription model. 

My advice would be to have a good book on performance issues. While it's a stable server, you need to put in the effort to know and understand it. It's not just a series of next-click installations but rather a basic installation that requires knowledge and learning.

Overall, I would rate the solution a nine out of ten. I would like to see improvements in administrative tools and diagnostic tools.

We use the tool for our ERP solution. 

The tool's implementation should be easier. The product is also expensive. 

I have been using the solution for 15 years. 

The tool is stable. 

The tool is scalable. My company has 1000 users for the tool. 

The tool's technical support is very good. 

The tool's setup is difficult. The product's setup took about three months to complete. We required seven technical staff for the tool's deployment. 

We implemented the product with the help of other people. 

The tool's pricing is yearly. 

I would rate the solution a nine out of ten.